Rote Liste und kommentiertes Verzeichnis der Brutvogelarten Baden-Württembergs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Baden-Württemberg sind in dem 30-jährigen Zeitraum einschließlich dervorliegenden insgesamt fünf Fassungen der Roten Liste der gefährdeten Vogelarten erschienen, die jeweils auf den neuesten Stand der Erforschung der Vogelwelt Baden-Württembergs gebracht wurden. Die einzelnen Fassungen der Roten Liste sind 1973 (1. Fassung, Berthold, Ertel & Hölzinger 1974, 1975), 1977 (2. Fassung, Berthold, Ertel, Hölzinger, Kalchreuter & Ruge 1977), 1981 (3. Fassung, Hölzinger, Berthold, Kroymann & Ruge 1981), 1996 (4. Fassung, Hölzinger, Berthold, König & Mahler 1996) und 2007 (5., vorliegende Fassung) herausgegeben worden. In diesem über 30-jährigen Zeitraum wurden die Kriterien für die Roten Listen entsprechend dem Fortschritt der ornithologischen Forschung zunehmend mehr auf quantitative Grundlagen gestellt. Die Roten Listen waren und sind das Ergebnis systematischer und programmatisch orientierter Bestandsaufnahmen der Vogelwelt abseits emotionaler und naturschutzpolitischer Beurteilung.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.033 | 0.005 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".